This study aims at a critical evaluation of the report produced by the United Nation Human Right Council Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict dubbed the Goldstone Report.By interpreting relevant instruments of IHL and applying them to the key military operations on which the mission analyzed and passed their judgment.Hinging on the works of conflict scholars to support the interpretations of the legal instrument of armed conflict utilized,the study is of the view that the claim by the Goldstone Report that the Israeli Defense Force committed war crimes and crimes against humanity in the cause of carrying out the Operation Cast Lead in Gaza Strip is not necessarily the case.The study also holds that the report is problematic because the HRC was biased in its choice of members for the mission and the mandate which stem from the HRC Resolution S 9/1 was basically prejudged on the subject matter to be investigated.Being that conflicts of this nature which the UN may need to investigate may arise in the future within Nation States,the study recommends,among other things,that HRC,its fact finding mission mandates and its mission be devoid of any form of prejudice and prejudgment.